Neos Cosmos sought the views of 35 young Greek Australians aged 18 to 25 on their voting intentions in the First Nations Voices to Parliament referendum which was held this Saturday, October 14.
Kosmos Samaras of RedBridge Group Australia and former Labor strategist says the outlook looks “bleak for the Yes vote”. He added that those under 30 are more likely to vote “yes”, as are those with a degree, those who speak another language at home and, in particular, more recently arrived immigrants.
Of the 35 young Greek Australians Neos Cosmos surveyed, 37.1 percent were a firm yes, 5.7 percent were undecided, while 42.5 percent were a firm no. Older Australians without a university degree, “generally in the suburbs and outer regions of this country, intend to vote ‘no’.”
A theme among young Greek Australians who said they would vote “yes” was recognizing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as Australia’s original inhabitants, and the Voice becoming a better way to address the challenges in health, employment and education faced by many First Nations people.
Young Greek Australians for Yes
An intriguing aspect was the number of young Greek Australians who wished to remain anonymous, which may suggest that the poll and the debates surrounding it have become feverish at worst and uncomfortable for many.
Kosta, (pseudonym) a higher education student, said Neos Cosmos that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people “have a lot of knowledge they can share” with other Australians.
“I also believe that everyone has the right to use their voice and that we should listen to what indigenous people have to say to understand their views on a range of issues and also to learn about and respect their culture .
Tash Hortis, from Deakin University, said she would vote yes because “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people should be recognized as members of Australia’s First Nations”.
“It’s about respecting history and honoring our First Nations people. As a third generation Greek Australian, my family came here and settled, and I am not a First Nations person. However, we must include all Australians and welcome them all equally.
Harry Neroupos, a hotel worker, will vote yes.
“Now is not the time to stand in the way of progress and reconciliation,” Harry said.
He added that as a person of Greek and Cypriot descent, he understood “how the culture and people feel under occupation and repression.”
“I think Voice is important for reconciliation with our Indigenous communities.”
Another argument for Yes was that, given that First Nations Australians only make up 3% of the Australian population, the Voice would provide them with a real platform to be listened to.
Many Yes voters raised the need to anchor the voice of First Nations in the Constitution, ensuring permanence as a body that no future government could dismiss.
Young Greek Australians for no
Those on the “no” side questioned the effectiveness of a voice in Parliament to resolve the problems many indigenous communities face. Others were reluctant to make changes to the constitution.
A tertiary student, Harry (pseudonym), said the referendum “has caused a huge divide between non-Indigenous Australians and the Indigenous community”.
“If the community for whom this decision is important is incapable of taking a uniform position on the referendum, how can I, as an outsider, be able to make a decision,” Harry said. Neos Cosmosadding: “I also think it will widen the inequality gap. »
Some members of the No camp argued that too much money had been spent on the referendum, when it could have been better spent on solving the problems faced by Indigenous Australians.
One student, Anna (not her name), said a resounding “no” and first called for a treaty.
“There has been no legitimate discussion of the substance of a treaty; the hundreds of millions spent on advertising should have been injected into indigenous communities.
“If you want to make effective change for Indigenous people, make education and housing free while you’re in college,” she said.
A common theme was the perceived lack of unity among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders during the referendum.
Spiro (not his real name) said First Nations Australians “already have a voice, and there are First Nations people telling us to vote no”.
Other No respondents believe that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people already have sufficient rights and benefits.
Many on the No side agreed with some aspects of the proposal, with one respondent saying they supported constitutional recognition but had concerns about the advisory body, as he believed it would be permanent and not elected.
Some voted “no” thinking that “race” would be enshrined in the Constitution. One of the “Yes” voters opposed the idea. They said it was “not about race” but about indigeneity and that a Voice is about recognizing the first inhabitants of this land.
The fog of confusion
A belief shared by “yes” and “no” voters was that this proposal was unclear and lacked information on what it might look like next.
It is worth noting that in the 1999 Australian Republic Referendum, the last referendum held in that country, many people voted no because they did not agree with the proposed model, even though they believed in the importance of becoming a republic.
The perceived lack of clarity is most telling, indicating an inability to explain how the Voice would work properly. The arguments of the Yes and No campaigns have caused confusion among voters, mainly because the issue is not bipartisan and has become politicized.
An encouraging model that has emerged among young Greek Australians Neos Cosmos Participants from both the Yes and No camps spoke about the desire to bridge the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians and recognize their unique place as Australia’s First Nations people.
Samaras also echoed this sentiment in his research and, in an interview with Michelle Grattan for Conversation, said:
“There’s a lot of empathy and compassion out there (toward Indigenous people), and it doesn’t matter what age groups and what part of Australia we’re sitting in and talking to people.”
Whatever the result this Saturday, the poor communication of the Yes campaign and, above all, the absence of bipartisanship could have generated a lot of confusion and hesitation among many.